From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 10:59:14 GMT
Subject: Re: error with $ git push origin HEAD:newbranch
Message-ID: <20110505105914.GA464@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <loom.20110505T114511-660@post.gmane.org>

On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 10:06:21AM +0000, chris wrote:

> Yes, indeed.  I suppose it must be the situation that I've never done that
> before then.  While I certainly I have pushed a detached head before, it must 
> have always been to an existing branch.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying this.
> 
> It is slightly surprising that git-push doesn't default to assuming one means 
> refs/heads/newbranch in this case.  I don't see a reason not to?

Consider something like:

  $ git checkout v1.5
  $ git push origin HEAD:foo

Would you want "foo" to be a branch or a tag? I can see arguments for
either.

Rather than trying to guess, it's fairly easy to disambiguate. For a
branch, either:

  $ git push origin HEAD:refs/heads/foo

or

  $ git branch foo
  $ git push origin HEAD

would work, depending on whether or not you want a local branch.

-Peff